About your Search

20121117
20121117
STATION
KQEH (PBS) 3
KRCB (PBS) 3
WETA 3
CSPAN 2
KQED (PBS) 2
MSNBC 2
MSNBCW 2
WMPT (PBS) 2
CNN 1
CNNW 1
CSPAN2 1
LANGUAGE
English 26
Search Results 0 to 25 of about 26 (some duplicates have been removed)
had not had super pacs romney would have raised money and the other candidates would not have. they raised millions themselves virtually. the millionaires and billionaires funded them. each of them had one billionaire that kept them in the race and if that hadn't happened they would have had no money to pay for gas in a car. they would have been out. >> you're saying the billionaires kept it going? >> absolutely. they kept them going for months in the way that the public never would have and they attacked, used the billionaire's money to attack romney. he had to spend his money to defend himself and raise a lot of money through his super pac to defend himself, but the result was the election took much longer to get a republican nominee than the republicans had hoped and romney was broke starting. if you look at what the democrats are saying now, it was we had an advantage because we were sitting lying in wait for them. obama had raised hundreds of millions of dollars that he could spend on advertising to define romney in the early summer and the romney campaign couldn't hit ba
time. but most to have the money was spent by supporters of mitt romney, and it didn't win the electorate. so should we be caring anymore? is it okay for them to be throwing their money away if they want to and the message not getting through? >> well, i felt it was a perfect example of free market economies, right? all the money that was spent -- what was it, $8 million -- i think it was $800 million, relative to $500 million on the left. didn't work. the electorate made their voice known and i think what's particularly powerful is this is an election cycle where i think the american public, for the first time in a long time, said enough is enough all the horrible things that were being said about women, in fact, insured many women's victory because a vote for mccaskill was against the horrible things akin was saying. not so much a vote for donnelly, but a vote for the things his opponent was saying. so i think citizens united already demonstrated itself to not have the overweaning preemptive effect that was predicted. >> first of all, if you add at what both candidates sp
and advertising are wildly exaggerated in their impact. but it had not been for mitt romney's money and carpet bombing of fizz opponent in the primaries, he would not have been nominated by a convention that never gave him it's hearty, , barely gave him its acquiescence. this is the second election in a row in which the republicans have nominated a candidate somewhat reluctantly. that the base release was not enthused about. one consequence of that is that candidate had to run a campaign that never really felt authentic, then never felt passionate. and the electorate picked up on it. we were told this was, as all campaigns for president seeking reelection, but this was a referendum on barack obama i have been suggesting for a long time that it turned into a referendum on the modern republican party. i will also reiterate something i have been saying for a while. that is the republican party is unlikely to become the nation's governing party until it deals with the ghost of ronald reagan and the reality of rush limbaugh. i obviously mean the stand in for what has come to be called the conservat
of loopholes and creating a giant one loophole that you can try to shift money into. the ira analogy is apt. if you look at the tax return mitt romney release, a big part of the way he was amused relating things to lower his tax liability was -- a big part of the way he was manipulating keys to lower his tax liability was the ira. >> it is the base that matters. that is where you get the important tax policy decisions. this is a broader base than we have right now. most of what we do is to subsidize consumption through the tax code. with a broader base, you can raise a lot of revenue. the race too much in mind opinion. his taxes people on what they take out of the economy. it does not tax them on what they contribute. >> hours is a consumption tax on income as well. -- our is a consumption based tax on income as well. we do not tax people for what they put into the economy. we incentivize them to save. that applies to whether you are mitt romney or somebody who is just starting out. that is important. >> i think that a progressive consumption tax could work and we could move very eventually
a wonderful and safe weekend. good night. >>> election is over and mitt romney is still going dirty. >> it's a proven political strategy give a bunch of money from the government to a group and guess what? they'll vote for you. >> we have the tape and he has extra cheap shots he took at balm we will -- obama we'll explain. and down goes hostess. who is at fault. >> it's the company's way of lying to us. >> that doesn't mean you should strike and put 17,000 or 18,000 others out of work because you are unhappy with the terms. >> we have very unique coverage and tell you what you are not getting about the real story behind that bankruptcy. >> and get a load of this pro-life politician. >> tennessee voters responding to a bombshell revelation about newly reelected representative. >> the doctor who slept with all his patients and pushed for how many abortions. that proy life guy? we'll tell you. and to top it off a ridiculous elbow of the day. fun for everybody. it's go time. note not -- | [music] | we start with
-- evangelical about signing people up to register to give money through facebook and twitter. the romney campaign obviously got a later start because he was not the incumbent but also i think didn't quite have the fervent belief that this deserved a lot of resources. >> suarez: the romney campaign, however, did have a computer-based modelling system like the obama campaign, called orca. >> like the whale and it failed by all accounts. it didn't do what it was supposed to do on election day which was to get, to find out who was voting and who wasn't so they could get the supporters out to make sure that those people were voting. >> and the romney campaign did put a lot of resources into that system. and unfortunately for that side, it crashed. a lot of volunteers went home. they couldn't get the information about identifying voters. and this was supposed to be its answer to the restauranted obama ground game, the president's tea that he had spent a couple years putting in place. coming back to this question of digital spending, if you go to the next graphic. look at the increase from 2008
money but side point. romney's framing of the president's campaign strategy is, of course, offensive but it is also not entirely inaccurate. the president did, indeed, deliver on some of the major policy priorities of those core democratic constituencies. mandatory insurance coverage for birth control, making student loans more affordable, and deferring action, as i said on young, undocumented immigrants among other things. romney calls those gifts, and in many cases a majority of americans would call them good policy. what republicans seem to be picking up on is key components of the president's coalition exerted considerable leverage over the white house during the presidential campaign. know as we enter the fight over what i and some others are calling the fiscal curve the combination of tax increases and spending cuts set to start on january 1st, the question is will the left retain any of that leverage over the president, or has it disappeared? on tuesday, a group of union leaders and progressive organizers met with president obama at the white house. lee saunders, president of
the u.n. ambassador and to besmirch her reputation is outrageous. gwen: and mitt romney stirs intraparty recrimination with this post-election analysis. >> it's a proven political strategy, which is give a bunch of money from the government to a group and, guess what, they'll vote for you. the giving away free stuff is a hard thing to compete with. >> we need to stop being the dumb party. we don't win elections by insulting voters. gwen: it's the circle of political life. covering the week, david wessel of the "wall street journal," helene cooper of the "new york times." martha raddatz of abc news, and charles babington of the "associated press." >> award winning reporting and analysis covering history as it happens. live from our nation's capital, this is "washington week" with gwen ifill, produced in association with "national journal." corporate funding for "washington week" is provided by -- ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> wherever it goes, the economy comes to life. norfolk southern, one line, infinite possibilities. >> we know why we're here. to connect our forces to what they need when they ne
more interested in making money than handouts. mitt romney made a wonderful job of his concession speech the night of the election. >> you say certain things in public. what you say in private tends to reflect your real feelings. >> you have to learn there is no private anymore. there just isn't in that size group. >> all right. sit tight. the best and worst of the week. into their work, their name on the door, and their heart into their community. small business saturday is a day to show our support. a day to shop at stores owned by our friends and neighbors. and do our part for the businesses that do so much for us. on november 24th, let's get out and shop small. >>> and there's a beautiful look at the capitol building in d.c. let's get back to the best week worst week. ladies first, susan, who's your best and worst this week? >> the worst goes to mitt romney for everything we covered in the previous segment. on top of it, he gave such a great concession speech and then to have these comments roll out makes him look really bitter and frankly, a little disappointing for the repub
talk about his super pac television advertisements against mitt romney while potter addressed role of super pac in election going forward. this is about a half an hour. >> next we have we find out whether the billionaires got their money worth this campaign. where the money went, with trier potter who is general count of john mccain's campaign and a lawyer. if you're setting up a pac, because call him. he's a again yous. we have bill burr ton, head of obama's pack priority u.s.a. and we have the editor of the atlantic magazine. or as i now think of him the brother of senator michael bennett who spoke this morning. we have -- plldz we are going to set it up in an unusual way for us. [applause] everything you ever want to know about what a super pac is. was played out on the colbert report with stephen and john mccain trevor potter is the lawyer for the colbert super pac. so he's been on colbert many, many times. and this little segment is colbert handing off his pack to john mccain all of which, according to trevor, to john stewart is perfectly legal. queue the tape. >> can i run fo
republicans are pouncing on mitt romney and his eye-popping take on why he lost the election. the louisiana governor bobby jindal vets his disapproval right here in "the situation room." what if there was a new way to deal with money that focused less on fees and more... on what matters? maybe your bank account is taking too much time and maybe it's costing too much money. introducing bluebird by american express and walmart. your alternative to checking and debit. it's loaded with features, not fees. because we think your money should stay where it belongs. with you. the value you expect. the service you deserve. it feels good to bluebird. get it at your local walmart. there's natural gas under my town. it's a game changer. ♪ it means cleaner, cheaper american-made energy. but we've got to be careful how we get it. design the wells to be safe. thousands of jobs. use the most advanced technology to protect our water. billions in the economy. at chevron, if we can't do it right, we won't do it at all. we've got to think long term. we've got to think long term. ♪ [ male announcer ] jill a
of on the left. have you had people of all stripes crunching these numbers ever since mitt romney said let's cap deductions and the answer is the money is there if is he willing to abandon this kind of liberal orthodoxy that you have to raise tax rates. >> bring in 749 billion in extra revenue to do that. >> to limit deductions, to $50,000 a year, that would bring in 749 billion. how much would letting the tax cuts, the bush tax cuts expire for those making 250 and up? >> expirations he wants to allow 800 billion. that's what analysts have said on all sides have said that's what you can get if you limit deductions. in fact, the romney plan, capping deductions at $17,000 i think everyone agrees it would give you more than the president is asking for this 1.6 trillion. >> alisyn: that's right. that's what the tax policy center did he dued that romney's plan capping at 17,000 bring in more. how can both sides be so far apart? are they just playing chicken with each other okay i will let you go off the fiscal cliff. you let me go of o00 fiscal cliff what's going to happen? >> it's a weird scenario.
Search Results 0 to 25 of about 26 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)